metalgearfandomcom-20200222-history
User talk:Doulomb
Mgs4, welcome to the ! Thanks for your edit to the Template:GameNav page. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! Bluerock (talk) 22:01, July 10, 2015 (UTC) :Just so both of you are aware, I posted a link to a Tumblr post that elaborated a bit on what Kojima was trying to convey via Portable Ops's stance in canon and why it's frequently excluded, Rising as well. Hopefully, that will quell most of the canon fight that's going on regarding those two games. The post is here: http://solidkenny87.tumblr.com/post/97125545680/clearer-translation-of-kojimas-mpo-answer Weedle McHairybug (talk) 17:54, July 11, 2015 (UTC) :Here is what I wrote explaining my stance to someone else. :That information is outdated. As we've drawn closer to the release of The Phantom Pain, series creator Hideo Kojima has released a great deal of information that has superseded the sources you've given. To make it clear, the games that are canon are MG, MG2, MGS1 - V as well as Peace Walker. I'll call these the "Core8" for clarity. Firstly, Konami released this image in the last year detailing the Metal Gear Saga timeline. Notice that it only contains the Core8 games. Secondly there is this newer interview from 2015 with Kojima where he says the following: "I always say 'this will be my last Metal Gear,'" Kojima said, "but the games in the series that I've personally designed and produced -- Metal Gear on MSX, MG2, MGS1, 2, 3, 4, Peace Walker, and now MGSV -- are what constitute a single 'Metal Gear Saga.' With MGSV, I'm finally closing the loop on that saga." : Once again he refers to the Metal Gear saga of canon games as consisting of the Core8. I can't think of anything more explicit than this. I'd love to hear any response you have to this, but I think this new information takes precedence. Doulomb (talk) 18:00, July 11, 2015 (UTC) : : : ::That Tumblr post was NOT outdated, actually. It was made just within this year. And besides which, the timelines were also made in 2012-2013, and I might as well remind you that MGS4 and Peace Walker both acknowledged Portable Ops directly and within the story in a way that wasn't a fourth wall break (well, okay, maybe a slight fourth wall break in the case of one of the references in MGS4). Weedle McHairybug (talk) 21:13, September 6, 2015 (UTC) ::If you were paying attention you would notice that the person who posted that tumblr is acutally on my side of the argument. He hates Rising and Portable Ops and makes videos such as this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMlZ-HQY4jQ ::MGS4 had some pictures in a church, that is just advertising not a real link. Its practically a throw away reference. Peace Walker had Miller call the game "crap". You are so incredibly foolish that you think these are actually strong proof that the game is canon. Grow up dude.Doulomb (talk) 17:34, September 7, 2015 (UTC) So what was the significance of Miller mentioning San Hieronymo. Miller wasn't even involved and MSF was located in Baranquilla. I really didn't understand what he meant by "leaving that crap behind." Was what he said canon or just breaking the 4th wall? -- 21:07, September 6, 2015 (UTC) :Definitely not a fourth wall break. If it was a fourth wall break, it would have been a bit more direct, like using the title of the game instead of just the game's setting. Not to mention, it's not the first time Miller acknowledged stuff he wasn't personally present for, since he also referenced stuff from Snake Eater as well (the bit about Big Boss being experienced with the Fulton, as well as talking about Snake's time in FOXHOUND and FOX). Weedle McHairybug (talk) 21:11, September 6, 2015 (UTC) :Not a 4th wall break. This is just more proof that the events shown in Portable Ops were not valid/canonical and take place in an alternate universe. Since we are 100% certain that Peace Walker is canon, then we must take its version of events as being more accurate. SInce Miller mentions the San Hieronymo incident this means that he was involved in it to a prominent degree. :However ''this is where the cotnradiction lies. Miller does not appear at all in Portable Ops which means that there is a contradiction between the PW version and the PoOps version. Since PW is more accurate (Kojima wrote and directed it, rather than just produced it), then we must acknowledge that the Portable Ops telling of events is faulty and non-canon. :Therefore we now know the following: :*Portable Ops contradicts canon game Peace Walker's version of events :*PoOps is either non-canon or alternate timeline :*In the canon timeline there was a San Hieronymo Incident and Miller was involved in it. I would guess that this is Kojima's way of retconning Portable Ops story into oblivion. He clearly has disdain for the story anyways because throug Kaz he refers to it as "crap". Anyways hope this clears things up! Doulomb (talk) 22:32, September 6, 2015 (UTC) ::Thanks Doulomb. It's a shame that canonically Sokolov did not survive Volgin's beating and therefore was never reunited with his family. :( Sokolov surviving was the best part of Portable Ops. Then again, the story wasn't even written by a member of Konami unlike Rising. Good luck with your edit war with Weedle. Hopefully Bluerock will do something about him soon and fix all of the Portable Ops and Rising articles. Also, one more question, since the "deviously cunning strategist" doesn't exist, what did EVA mean when she said that the CIA eliminated The Boss because they feared her charisma? I thought they had no clue Volgin would use the nuke. Please reply when you have time. -- 13:49, September 7, 2015 (UTC) ::::Thank you! Its nice to know that someone else is on my side with this one. Hopefully Bluerock can deal with it so that the non-trolls on this website can actually contribute good information and make sure the wiki portrays the most up to date version of the facts. Regarding the CIA eliminating The Boss, I think that the CIA is really a standin for the American Philosophers who were worried about her charisma being a threat to their existence. That said they didn't actually plan for her to die ahead of time but when Volgin used the nuke they decided to kill 2 birds with one stone and get rid of The Boss. Thats just my take on it though. Let me know if I left anything unlcear. :D Doulomb (talk) 16:57, September 7, 2015 (UTC) :::::No problem. I guess my only remaining question is are the side ops (not including Deja Vu and Jamais Vu) canon? A briefing tape in Ground Zeroes implies that Big Boss and Miller had never even heard of the base until Paz was captured. -- 17:54, September 7, 2015 (UTC) :::::::This one is really tough to say because some of the side missions from GZ carry over into Phantom Pain. For example Glaz and Palitz can be recruited to Mother Base if you extracted them in GZ. It seems to me that the most likely explanation is that they are "semi-canon" which is sort of hinted when it calls them "pseudo-historical". I would say that they did happen but te details might be off. For example they all happened, just at different military bases besides Camp Omega. The reason GZ shows them all happening there is just so they can reuse the map alot. Makes sense? Regards, Doulomb (talk) 18:09, September 7, 2015 (UTC) :::No, if Kojima wanted to make a statement about MPO, especially retconning it into oblivion, he would have done it directly to make clear that it was a fourth wall break. Has anyone forgotten about how several of Miller's calls in MG2 and MGS explicitly referenced the fact that the player was playing a game? Do something like that. And anyways, how do you explain the presence of stills from Portable Ops in Ocelot's history lecture if it was non-canon, or it's presence in the MGS4 Database. And just because Miller referenced MPO in terms of story doesn't mean he was breaking the fourth wall. Have both of you completely forgotten that this was the same game that had Miller explicitly reference Snake Eater a few times despite his also not being present for the events as well? Weedle McHairybug (talk) 13:52, September 7, 2015 (UTC) Hey, soooo, I got your message on tumblr. But it was sent as a post submission and I'm not sure how comfortable you are with me replying to it in public. Sadly, since it was a post submission (I have no idea why I had that turned on) I have no idea how to speak to you privately. Is there an e-mail or twitter I can use to PM you? But anyway, for now, thank you for the kinds words! =D - medicxquiet : I'm so glad to hear back from you! I think you made the right call not to reply publicly because doing so might have tipped our hand. I sent it to you as a post submission instead of an ask because your ask is configured to accept only logged in submissions and I didn't want to go through the tumblr registration BS. You can email me at "44ed796d (at) opayq (dot) com", no quotes. Let me know if you have any problems contacting me that way. I'm always one for the most efficient communication possible, so perhaps later when you're more comfortable we could move to IM or skype or something like that for the most optimal discussion possible. Anyways, I'm looking forward to your response. Regards, Doulomb (talk) 13:30, September 17, 2015 (UTC) Outside Metal Gear Saga Doulomb, ya gotta discuss site-wide changes first. I also renamed the awkward "Outside Metal Gear Saga" category title.--Bluerock (talk) 13:04, December 14, 2015 (UTC) : My bad haha. Just procrastinating before an exam so I'm not thinking 100% clearly.That name was definitely not good at all but it was sort of a placeholder so I could start seeing how things looked. Anyways my impetus for doing this was because I was sick of debating about what is and isnt canon. Instead I think it makes more sense to divide based on what is or isnt a part of the core Metal Gear Saga (MGS1-V, PW, MG1/2). Your thoughts? Doulomb (talk) 13:08, December 14, 2015 (UTC) :: For the record, I'm willing to let you put up the outside the metal gear saga bit as long as you DON'T imply that it's not firmly canon. Last I checked, even Peace Walker referenced the events of Portable Ops. And if it's referenced, it's canon. Besides, most of the MSX2 games due to the heavy amount of retcons it experienced by definition can't qualify as canon either, even if they ARE Core-games. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 13:22, December 14, 2015 (UTC) :::The template never did imply it's firmly not canon. Use your temporary ban to chill out and quit being disruptive, Weedle. I reworded it anyway so people can take it or leave it as they like. I'm going to temporarily remove the category from the template though, as it's only really suited for game articles at present. --Bluerock (talk) 13:51, December 14, 2015 (UTC) ::::Thanks for rewording it, because the initial description DID imply that it was not firmly canon (it said "as such, it's canonicity is disputed.". It's words, not mine.). You might want to reword the "spin-off games" category description, though, because listing Portable Ops and Rising with definitively non-canon games such as the Mobile games and Ghost Babel does give the implication unless directly stated otherwise that they were non-canon, which was my main beef with how it was done. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 18:08, December 15, 2015 (UTC) ::::::Thanks Bluerock, glad to see some agreement finally. To be fair, (and I can't believe I'm saying this ) but Weedles response was actually surprisingly reasonable compared to his past reactions (I.e. aggressively reverting anything he disagreed with) Two things that would be nice to change about the template are the header text and the icon. It would be nice if we could quote an applicable Metal Gear line that fits the message. So far the only thing I can think of is when Kaz describes the Jamais vu mission as "some kind of bad dream". Also the image is really just a placeholder. Currently its the portable ops logo from the vu missions because the logo trial essentially mirrors what Kojima said about the saga. That said the image is probably obscure and doesn't immediately fit the context. Let me know if you guys have any ideas or disagree about changing it.Doulomb (talk) 14:03, December 14, 2015 (UTC) ::::::::Regarding a quote, you could try Snake's speech to Raiden about choosing his own path in MGS2, or even The Boss's statement about how one must be subservient to the times in MGS3 (not that I particularly like or agree with either personally, but it does fit regarding relativity nonetheless). Weedle McHairybug (talk) 18:15, December 15, 2015 (UTC) :I rolled back Weedle's edits because he ''was aggresively reveting, with the same old "it was mentioned/pictured, so it MUST be canon" argument. The rollbacks just stopped his constant whining from appearing down the whole Recent Activity page, which gets real irritating. Hopefully, he'll get the point, when he returns tomorrow. :As for the in-game comment, one possible option, to paraphrase Kaz, "Hmm, I don't remember that one. It mustn't be that important." That would provide context for the image at least, until a different image is suggested (if necessary).--Bluerock (talk) 15:50, December 14, 2015 (UTC) ::::::Excuse my sloppy editing Bluerock, but when the image of the template has the summary, ::::::"MGS Portable Ops Logo in Ground Zeroes Deja Vu Mission. As a noncanon game, the PoOps MGS Portable Ops Logo in Ground Zeroes Deja Vu Mission. As a noncanon game, the PoOps logo cannot be erased and is not recognized by Kaz." seems to be a subtle "PO an't canon" agrument. Might as well place that template on any article that has information from not only PO but Revengeance as well. My final thought is, why is a snappy "take that" from a noncanon mission suddenly dismissing the canon of PO? :The use of the image isn't a "sudden" dismissal, it's just the most effective in-game image to illustrate the template with. Kaz's comments in the GZ Extra Ops are not being used as the sole source regarding the creator's exclusion of games from the main storyline, as it's been known for a fairly long time based on past comments. I was unaware of the image's description because it isn't really relevant, but it does need changing because the game's are never referred to as non-canon, just unimportant. I think it's appropriate to highlight the subjects that the creator does not feel fit in the main story, and ultimately let the reader determine how they want to take it, which is why the template was reworded. As such, I agree that it is also applicable to topics solely based on Revengeance, along with those from MPO. --Bluerock (talk) 17:39, December 15, 2015 (UTC) ::Just a quick update about some of the changes I made. First, I cropped the image quite a bit so that the logo is more easily visible and there is less dead space. Secondly I changed the Alert message to the recommended Kaz quote as I think it works the best especially alongside the image.By the way, Bluerock do you mind adding the template to the locked pages (revengeance and PoOps, any others that are relevant) ? Thanks Doulomb (talk) 18:48, December 16, 2015 (UTC) Just wanted to mention that Omega Fighter removed most of the templates I had added to various pages because he believes they should only be on pages where the canonicity has been disputed and debated in the community. I posted a note on his talk page explaining that it should be discussed first before going forward with it and directed him to this page. Any thoughts about this? I tend to disagree, because the template is supposed to be for "NonMetalGearSaga" content regardless of how its viewed in the community. For example, even though Ghost Babel is widely considered non-canon, I believe the notice is still relevant, to long time fans and series newcomers alike. What are your thoughts though guys? Doulomb (talk) 00:34, December 17, 2015 (UTC) :So what should we do with Sokolov and the DCI's articles? Portable Ops has them showing up alive and being shot in the head respectively while Peace Walker doesn't comment on their fate. Phantom Pain even ignores Ocelot killing the DCI and taking the Legacy. -- 02:03, December 17, 2015 (UTC) ::I actually think that two templates, one each specifically for MPO and MGR subjects, may be the best option. I'm not fond of the term "non-saga," because there's both Kojima's "main" saga, and the wider saga in general (everything), which makes it a bit too confusing, especially for visitors. The current template would also be redundant for content from other spin-off games, because they are already noted as being non-canon. ::In that respect, I support Omega's view, so far as this only being applicable to MPO and MGR, not because its canonicity is debatable by the community, but because those games can fit into the main continuity, unlike Acid, or Ghost Babel, etc. ::Regarding usage, I think these templates are only really suitable for in-universe content, not games themselves, just like the canon/non-canon templates. ::For canon subjects that have content from MPO/MGR, just restructure the article so there is a single, concise, subsection in the main article (i.e. History/Biography) housing that content, with a template variant at the start and end to highlight it. For "Behind the scenes" this is not necessary. For those bloated "Personality" sections, MPO/MGR content should just be excised, since there shouldn't be anything really unique from those games regarding the canon characters themselves. ::Thoughts? --Bluerock (talk) 16:19, December 17, 2015 (UTC) ::::I think 2 templates makes sense,but instead of being for MPO and MGR I think we should have one for confirmed non-canon games like Ghost Babel and then one for the grey area games that fall outside the saga. Therefore it would be split into NonCanon and NonMetalGearSaga templates. While the canon status of these games may be obvious to us, it wouldn't be to everyone, and these notices are the most effective way to demonstrate this information. ::::The other thing is that I disagree with keeping the templates off the main MPO/MGR articles. I think that's actually the most important spot to have them.Doulomb (talk) 16:51, December 17, 2015 (UTC) :::::Pardon me for asking but why were snapshots of PO shown during EVA and Ocelot's speeches in MGS4? I know that the paintings in the church were just easter eggs like the GB poster in MGS2. -- 13:52, December 18, 2015 (UTC :::::::Same thing, its another easter egg. It used to be sort of unclear, but thanks to new information we understand now. Check out the MPO talk page for more details. Doulomb (talk) 19:35, December 18, 2015 (UTC) ::::::::It's not an easter egg, especially when they used Snake Eater, Sons of Liberty, MGS1, heck, even the MSX2 games as stills for those speeches. And besides, if you're going to claim that's an easter egg, you might as well claim that Vulcan Raven's audio dialogue during EVA's speech was also an easter egg. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 19:43, December 18, 2015 (UTC) :::::::::That's a lame excuse because Snake is remembering how Raven knew he was half-Japanese. Only the player sees the PO stills. Anyway, thanks Doulomb. -- 20:25, December 18, 2015 (UTC) ::::::::::Only the player sees the montages. Does that mean all of them are non-canon as well, even the MSX2 games and the debate at the UN? Weedle McHairybug (talk) 21:56, December 18, 2015 (UTC) :::::::::::Debate at the U.N.? You'll have to refresh my memory. When did this take place? As for PO's canon status, you've been overruled by Bluerock and Doulomb so tough luck.-- 23:55, December 18, 2015 (UTC) :The game pages don't need templates, in the same way that non-canon games don't have templates declaring them being non-canon: it's overkill. A statement in the intro regarding canonicity is perfectly sufficient. It's story content that should really be the focus, i.e. in-universe articles. It gives the reader fair warning without being overly dismissive. --Bluerock (talk) 20:38, December 18, 2015 (UTC) ::Actually, Bluerock, unlike Doulomb, never said Portable Ops is non-canon. He did acknowledge it was a spin-off, sure, but then again, Resident Evil 3 Nemesis and Code Veronica were spinoffs as well, yet they had full canonicity regardless. So far as the UN debate, some of the footage used in various montage scenes featured a UN debate on the Bay of Pigs. It's most prevalent when The Boss relays the as Peace Walker revealed role she had in the Bay of Pigs Invasion. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 00:01, December 19, 2015 (UTC) :::I was referring to the new template created by Doulomb which Bluerock approved despite your objections. You were even blocked for a day by the guy for ’’being a nuisance’’ so it's obvious he can't stand you. -- 13:50, December 19, 2015 (UTC) ::::My only objection to the template was the fact that Doulomb implied it was non-canon or at the very least that it was in dispute, despite it being made clear, TWICE, by Kojima that it WAS canon. Heck, I even said I had no problem with the template itself in one of the first posts on this topic, just how it was presented. And even Bluerock after reading it ended up having to reword it specifically because it had some confusion. You think I'm kidding, I'll quote it to you: "The following is about a topic from outside the core Metal Gear saga. As such the canonical status of this information is unconfirmed." Bluerock reworded it to state "The following is about a topic from outside the core Metal Gear saga. It may contain some level of canonicity within the continuity. Reader discretion is advised." Weedle McHairybug (talk) 14:36, December 19, 2015 (UTC) ::::::Kojima hardly confirmed it was canon, but even if he did newer information supersedes the old information. ''This is obvious to literally everyone except you for some reason. Also the interview where he says that MPO and MGR lay outside the the timeline of the true Metal Gear Saga is literally the most solid possible confirmation that the games are not canon. ::::::Also I see nothing wrong with the original wording. It's completely true that the canonical status of those games is unconfirmed at best, and non-canon at worst. There is no possible alternative interpretation of the evidence, unless you simply ignore most of it like you do. While we can't say for sure that the game is non-canon, we do know for a fact that it is not fully canon like the games in the Metal Gear Saga.l ::::::Lastly, I just want to clear up my relationship to Bluerock. There is absolutely no favoritism between us. While we agree about this subject, we have disagreed before and we even have disagreements about specific details in this very topic. We do happen to get along better than he does with Weedle, but I suspect this has more to do with my positive attitude vs Weedles immaturity and lack of perspective. Doulomb (talk) 02:24, December 20, 2015 (UTC) :::::::Actually, Doulomb, Kojima confirmed it was canon twice: The first time around Peace Walker's release, and the second time just barely a year ago around the time ''Ground Zeroes was released, way back in 2014, just barely a year ago, almost two years ago. So if we're going to go by "most recent information", it's clear it's canon (Kojima said it happened, ergo, it's canon. Canon means it happened). Besides, by your logic, the MSX2 games themselves can't be canon either since practically everything about them has been retconned out of existence by Metal Gear Solid alone, to say little about all the retcons made to those games in the rest of the series. And please don't try to play the whole "there were a lot of continuity problems in Portable Ops to the rest of the series" card. I'll just point out that practically EVERY Metal Gear game has continuity problems. Metal Gear Solid 4, for example, has Solid Snake reacting to Roy Campbell's reveal that Liquid's running Outer Heaven as if he didn't even know about Liquid possessing Ocelot, and that was DESPITE his not only witnessing Liquid take control of Ocelot, twice, in two separate events, but even being implied by the second time it happened to have accepted that it happened. Heck, Peace Walker practically conflicted with EVA's account (and don't get me started on The Phantom Pain, where it basically bulldozed EVA's account to Snake, basically ruining their reunion and reconciliation). Or how about how the Patriots never learned to control people, let alone transform one person into another (despite the fact that the entire point behind the S3 Plan real one, not the misinformation fed to Ocelot was exactly what Big Boss claimed they could not do, and they outright succeeded, completely). And don't get me started on how the MSX2 games were utterly retconned to such an extent that people are begging for remakes partially because of this. If you were being truly honest with your convictions, you might as well state there IS no such thing as canon since Kojima just conflicts with even his own word and retcons everything, and say NONE of the games are canon at all precisely BECAUSE of all the retcons and inconsistencies. That's exactly what I would have said if I used your reasonings for Portable Ops not being canon, since no sense in applying it to one thing and not applying the same to others. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 02:42, December 20, 2015 (UTC) :::::::::First of all, you should source these claims about the interviews. Secondly the most recent interview is actually from 2015: https://www.youtube.com/watch?vote=WMlZ-HQY4jQ :::::::::therefore you're wrong, and the latest information is that it's strictly non-canon. :::::::::Also please don't put words in my mouth about "my logic" because all its showing is your lack of comprehension. My stance is that if Kojima says a game is or isn't canon then that's the final say. Somehow you are saying that because msx games have been retconed that "my logic" dictates they aren't canon? I never suggested anything remoty like that so this is just the usual Weedle bullshit and lies. :::::::::I am being truly honest with my convictions because the stuff you're accusing me of being hypocritical about is stuff I literally never even said or agreed with. My point is that Kojima ruled them non-canon and so they will.remain. I never even spoke about retcons at all except in response se to your bs. You just hate retcons because you don't understand them. Literally no one else has a problem with retcons because they are just a reasonable.thing to have in any series that's been around for a third of a century. :::::::::I really wish Bluerock or someone else would tell you off because maybe you'd listen to an admin or.if a group of people all told you the same thing you might actually accept the possibility that perhaps you are wrong. Are you honestly open to changing your mind and admitting you were wrong like an adult? Or are you just a man-child who changes the facts to suit his desired outcome? Doulomb (talk) 05:16, December 20, 2015 (UTC) ::::::::::I don't change facts, I cite them, thread bare. And also, you kept on saying that Portable Ops has had contradictions in various posts, and you even attempted to make an article claiming that Portable Ops had "story differences" that Bluerock and others ended up deleting, so yes, it is "your logic." Heck, even Bluerock recognized you were trying to claim they were non-canon due to contradictions by making that article, MPO Story Differences, as did The 2nd travel of the Titanic. And no, Kojima never ruled them non-canon at all. In fact, Kornflakes89 can even verify that Kojima had not explicitly ruled them non-canon. You're just projecting. Claiming they are outside the Core 8 does NOT mean it is non-canon. It just means it's not a main entry. There are plenty of games that are firmly canonical despite not even being main entries. Like Mega Man Xtreme 2 and Mega Man X6, or Resident Evil 3: Nemesis and Code:Veronica. ::::::::::Another thing, it's not even a third of a century, it's more like little over a quarter of a century, and Kojima ended up doing a lot of retcons with the third game in the series, made in 1998, just barely a decade, so no, I know retcons are a very bad thing and can only be done as a last resort. ::::::::::And here's the Twitch interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AoSmr6PijU and the podcast interview: http://www.kjp.konami.jp/gs/hideoblog_e/2010/07/000221.html where Kojima made clear they were canon. Unless Kojima explicitly says they are non-canon, they are canon. And no, saying they are spinoffs and not main games =/= confirmation of non-canonicity. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 10:42, December 20, 2015 (UTC)